Welcome to the Orioles Nation Forums! Like most online communities, you must register to post on our message board. However, posting is free--it always will be--and registration is a simple process. Become part of the growing Orioles Nation community and register now!

Boston Globe beat writer Nick Cafardo has a weekly column about MLB published each Sunday. It should be required reading for every baseball fan and is almost always referenced in MLB Trade Rumors. This weeks column has a section about Andy MacPhail in which AM states the following:

“I’m happy for Peter because nobody was more supportive of what we tried to do during those lean years than Peter. We stuck to a strategy and it paid off. We invested in the Dominican and it’s paid off big dividends.”

Does anyone even have a clue what "big dividends" out of the Dominican he's talking about?

Matt P wrote:Why do you wonder that? Andy has said nothing but good things about Peter during his time with the team and after his departure.

Yes, he was loyal; but there's loyalty and REALITY. To say that Angelos was somehow very supportive of an International player development program and that it produced "big dividends" requires pharmaceutical grade hallucinogens.

ofahn wrote:Yes, he was loyal; but there's loyalty and REALITY. To say that Angelos was somehow very supportive of an International player development program and that it produced "big dividends" requires pharmaceutical grade hallucinogens.

I'm going to choose to believe the respected baseball mind on this one. You have no idea how Angelos is or isn't.

You said that him being supportive requires pharmaceutical grade hullucinogens. I'm saying there is no possible way you, I, or anyone knows if he is supportive or not and I'm choosing to believe MacPhail.

Matt P wrote:Quit grasping at straws. Anyone reading knows what you meant. No reason to carry on. Nobody knows how Peter is these days.

I'm disappointed that you don't understand that there's a distinction with a significant difference from what I said and how you're interpreting it. I'm also disappointed that you seem to take easy offense when you don't understand someone elses POV or you disagree with it.

In fairness here, Andy McPhail is essentially out of baseball at the moment. It's very unlikely he would ever speak ill of any former employer in baseball regardless. Though you can bet that he's obligated not to speak ill of any of his employers from the past. He did some good work in Baltimore though his reign was a failure.

The article was essentially meaningless anyway. There never was any big dividend from the DR or anywhere internationally save perhaps Koji Uehara.

Why get all worked up on some beat writer having to meet a deadline for a throw away article?

Old Sneakers wrote:In fairness here, Andy McPhail is essentially out of baseball at the moment. It's very unlikely he would ever speak ill of any former employer in baseball regardless. Though you can bet that he's obligated not to speak ill of any of his employers from the past. He did some good work in Baltimore though his reign was a failure.

The article was essentially meaningless anyway. There never was any big dividend from the DR or anywhere internationally save perhaps Koji Uehara.

Why get all worked up on some beat writer having to meet a deadline for a throw away article?

That was essentially point. I just couldn't see how he could have said what I have in bold with a straight face.

I'll give AM credit for reviving the farm system and criticize him for not making a big enough investment there. He also made some good trades and was responsible for having scouts go to Japan to evaluate Chen. I still see our almost complete failure in the International market as a colossal missed opportunity and am actually a little offended that he would present it as a success.